QUESTIONS FOR THE KJV CULT

The KJV Only Resource Center -

This webpage courtesy of Pilgrim Publications

"Pilgrimettes" From THE PILGRIM

? QUESTIONS ?

FOR THE KJV-ONLY CULT

by GARY R. HUDSON

** as compared to any other existing "translation-ONLY" cult

(1) Must we possess a perfectly flawless bible translation in order to call it "the word of God"? If so, how do we know "it" is perfect? If not, why do some "limit" "the word of God" to only ONE "17th Century English" translation? Where was "the word of God" prior to 1611? Did our Pilgrim Fathers have "the word of God" when they brought the GENEVA BIBLE translation with them to North America?
(2) Were the KJV translators "LIARS" for saying that "the very meanest [poorest] translation" is still "the word of God"?
(3) Do you believe that the Hebrew and Greek used for the KJV are "the word of God"?
(4) Do you believe that the Hebrew and Greek underlying the KJV can "correct" the English?
(5) Do you believe that the English of the KJV "corrects" its own Hebrew and Greek texts from which it was translated?
(6) Is ANY translation "inspired"? Is the KJV an "inspired translation"?
(7) Is the KJV "scripture"? Is IT "given by inspiration of God"? [2 Tim. 3:16]
(8) WHEN was the KJV "given by inspiration of God" — 1611... or any of the KJV major/minor revisions in 1613, 1629, 1638, 1644, 1664, 1701, 1744, 1762, 1769, and the last one in 1850?

(9) In what language did Jesus Christ [not Peter Ruckman and others] teach that the Old Testament would be preserved forever according to Matthew 5:18?
(10) Where does the Bible teach that God will perfectly preserve His Word in the form of one seventeenth-century English translation?
(11) Did God lose the words of the originals when the "autographs" were destroyed?
(12) Did the KJV translators mislead their readers by saying that their New Testament was "translated out of the original Greek"? [title page of KJV N.T.] Were they "liars" for claiming to have "the original Greek" to translate from?
(13) Was "the original Greek" lost after 1611?
(14) Did the great Protestant Reformation (1517-1603) take place without "the word of God"?
(15) What copy or translations of "the word of God," used by the Reformers, was absolutely infallible and inerrant? [their main Bibles are well-known and copies still exist].
(16) IF... the KJV is "God's infallible and preserved word to the English-speaking people," did the "English-speaking people" have "the word of God" from 1525-1604?
(17) Was Tyndale's [1525], or Coverdale's [1535], or Matthew's [1537], or the Great [1539], or the Geneva [1560]... English Bibles absolutely infallible?
(18) If neither the KJV nor any other one version were absolutely inerrant, could a lost sinner still be "born again" by the "incorruptible word of God"? [1 Peter 1:23]
(19) If the KJV can "correct" the inspired originals, did the Hebrew and Greek originally "breathed out by God" need correction or improvement?
(20) Since most "KJV-Onlyites" believe the KJV is the inerrant and inspired "scripture" [2 Peter 1:20], and 2 Peter 1:21 says that "the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost," would you not therefore reason thus — "For the King James Version came not in 1611 by the will of man: but holy men of God translated as they were moved by the Holy Ghost"?
(21) Which reading is the verbally (word-for-word) inerrant scripture — "whom ye" [Cambridge KJV's] or, "whom he" [Oxford KJV's] at Jeremiah 34:16?
(22) Which reading is the verbally (word-for-word) inerrant scripture — "sin" [Cambridge KJV's] or "sins" [Oxford KJV's] at 2 Chronicles 33:19?
(23) Who publishes the infallible "INERRANT KJV"?
(24) Since the revisions of the KJV from 1613-1850 made (in addition to changes in punctuation, capitalization, and spelling) many hundreds of changes in words, word order, possessives, singulars for plurals, articles, pronouns, conjunctions, prepositions, entire phrases, and the addition and deletion of words — would you say the KJV was "verbally inerrant" in 1611... or 1629, 1638, 1644, 1664, 1701, 1744, 1762, 1769, or 1850?

KING JAMES

(25) Would you contend that God waited until a king named "JAMES" sat on the throne of England before perfectly preserving His Word in English, and would you think well of an "Epistle Dedicatory" that praises this king as "most dread Sovereign...Your Majesty's Royal Person..." — IF the historical FACT was revealed to you that King James was a practicing homosexual all of his life? [documentation — Antonia Fraser — "King James VI of Scotland, I of England" Knopf Publ./1975/pgs. 36-37, 123 || Caroline Bingham — "The Making of a King" Doubleday Publ./1969/pgs. 128-129, 197-198 || Otto J. Scott — "James I" Mason-Charter Publ./1976/pgs. 108, 111, 120, 194, 200, 224, 311, 353, 382 || David H. Wilson — "King James VI & I" Oxford Publ./1956/pgs. 36, 99-101, 336-337, 383-386, 395 || plus several encyclopedias]
(26) Would you contend that the KJV translator, Richard Thomson, who worked on Genesis-Kings in the Westminster group, was "led by God in translating" even though he was an alcoholic that "drank his fill daily" throughout the work? [Gustavus S. Paine — "The Men Behind the KJV" Baker Book House/1979/pgs. 40, 69]
(27) Is it possible that the rendition "gay clothing," in the KJV at James 2:3, could give the wrong impression to the modern-English KJV reader?
(28) Did dead people "wake up" in the morning according to Isaiah 37:36 in the KJV?
(29) Was "Baptist" John's last name according to Matthew 14:8 and Luke 7:20 in the KJV?
(30) Is 2 Corinthians 6:11-13 in the KJV understood or make any sense to the modern-English KJV reader? — "O ye Corinthians, our mouth is open unto you, our heart is enlarged. Ye are not straitened in us, but ye are straitened in your own bowels. Now for a recompense in the same, (I speak as unto my children,) be ye also enlarged." As clearly understood from the New International Version [NIV] — "We have spoken freely to you, Corinthians, and opened wide our hearts to you. We are not withholding our affection from you, but you are withholding yours from us. As a fair exchange — I speak as to my children — open wide your hearts also."
(31) Does the singular "oath's," occurring in every KJV at Matthew 14:9 and Mark 6:26, "correct" every Textus Receptus Greek which has the plural ("oaths") by the post-1611 publishers, misplacing the apostrophe?
(32) Did Jesus teach a way for men to be "worshiped" according to Luke 14:10 in the KJV, contradicting the first commandment and what He said in Luke 4:8? [Remember — you may not go the Greek for any "light" if you are a KJV-Onlyite!]
(33) Is the Holy Spirit an "it" according to John 1:32; Romans 8:16, 26; and 1 Peter 1:11 in the KJV? [Again — you may not go the Greek for any "light" if you are a KJV-Onlyite!]
(34) Does Luke 23:56 support a "Friday" crucifixion in the KJV? [No "day" here in Greek]
(35) Did Jesus command for a girl to be given "meat" to eat according to Luke 8:55 in the KJV? [or, "of them that sit at meat with thee." at Luke 14:10]

(36) Was Charles Haddon Spurgeon a "Bible-corrector" for saying that Romans 8:24 should be rendered "saved in hope," instead of the KJV's "saved by hope"? [Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit Vol 27, 1881, page 485 — see more Spurgeon KJV comments in What is "KJV-Onlyism?", his & many others' views in the article, "Quotes on Bible Translations."]
(37) Was J. Frank Norris a "Bible-corrector" for saying that the correct rendering of John 3:5 should be "born of water and the Spirit," and for saying that "repent and turn" in Acts 26:20 should be "repent, even turn"? [Norris-Wallace Debate, 1934, pgs. 108, 116]
Also, is Norman Pickering an "Alexandrian Apostate" for stating, "The nature of language does not permit a 'perfect' translation — the semantic area of words differs between languages so that there is seldom complete overlap. A 'perfect' translation of John 3:16 from Greek into English is impossible, for we have no perfect equivalent for "agapao" [translated "loved" in John 3:16]."?
(38) Was R. A. Torrey "lying" when he said the following in 1907 — "No one, so far as I know, holds that the English translation of the Bible is absolutely infallible and inerrant. The doctrine held by many is that the Scriptures as originally given were absolutely infallible and inerrant, and that our English translation is a substantially accurate rendering of the Scriptures as originally given"? [Difficulties in the Bible, page 17]
(39) Is Don Edwards correct in agreeing "in favor of canonizing our KJV," thus replacing the inspired canon in Hebrew and Greek? [The Flaming Torch, June 1989, page 6]
(40) Did God supernaturally "move His Word from the original languages to English" in 1611 as affirmed by The Flaming Torch? [same page above]

While I could go on with many more questions regarding the growing facets of "KJV-Onlyism," I have limited them to these 40. I am sure that Unlearned Men like... Peter Ruckman, Samuel Gipp, Jack Hyles, Don Edwards, Herb Evans, Joe Chambers, David Cloud, D. A. Waite, Walter Beebe, Jack Chick, Texe Marrs, E. L. Bynum, William Grady, Floyd Jones, Dallas Bunch, Brad Weniger, Herbert Noe, Larry Vance, Ken Johnson, Robert Diehl, (+ women like Gail Riplinger) and others_____ ("Birds of a feather flock together...") of their persuasion, would like to have the answers to these questions!

NOTES OF INTEREST

by Gary R. Hudson

"KING JAMES-ONLYISM"

and the "Egyptian Corruption" Argument

A friend recently asked me about one of the common objections raised by the KJV-Only movement to the use of "any manuscripts that come from Egypt." One particular preacher he sat under was very fond of launching into a tirade against "those evil modern bibles" because "they're based on manuscripts out of Egypt" and "the Bible says Egypt is a type of the WORLD!" This is obviously typical of Peter Ruckman, Chick Publications, Gail Riplinger, J. J. Ray, and other KJV "defenders" who recklessly throw every device they can concoct against the early manuscripts of the Greek New Testament. They reason as thus: "The Bible says Egypt is a type of the world; the world is associated with sin; therefore, it must logically follow that Alexandrian manuscripts are evil." This is certainly a "case study" in one of the best examples of "guilt by association" ever imagined.

Actually, the Bible making "Egypt a type of the world" (which, by the way, is not explicitly stated in the Bible, only implied), does not mean it teaches that all other regions of the planet are untainted by sin. In fact, it implies the very opposite! If the Bible teaches that "Egypt is a type of the WORLD," then it DOES "logically follow" that "the whole WORLD is typified by Egypt" — which, in the case of KJV-Onlys, would make no region of the entire planet safe for preserving Bible manuscripts! (read 1 John 5:19).

Bob Ross comments: We should also remember the wonderful Providence of the Lord in regard to Moses, Joseph and the Israelites in Egypt, as well as how the infant Jesus was taken to Egypt as a means of escaping death in Israel during the time of Herod's campaign of infanticide. The Lord is Sovereign in Egypt as well as in Antioch, Jerusalem, and Rome! He works His wonders all over! In fact, if you had to have the "right place" in which the Lord could do His work, it would have to be a "wrong place," as the whole world is defiled by sin.

If the history of the Textus Receptus itself is a history of revision, why is it beyond revision today? [ROBERT MARTIN, Accuracy of Translation and the NIV pg. 76]

"THE TRANSLATORS WERE UNINSPIRED MEN, AND CONSEQUENTLY LIABLE TO MISTAKES; THE TRANSLATION IS 'INSPIRED', SO FAR AS IT EXACTLY GIVES THE ORIGINAL ... SO FAR, NO MORE"

| JOHN GIRARDEAU |

"VARIETY OF TRANSLATIONS IS PROFITABLE FOR FINDING OUT OF THE SENSE OF THE SCRIPTURES."

| the TRANSLATORS of the KING JAMES VERSION to the READERS |

"THERE IS EVEN NOW, WITH SOME IGNORANT PERSONS, AN ASSUMPTION OF THE INFALLIBILITY AND EQUALITY WITH THE ORIGINAL, OF SOME PARTICULAR TRANSLATION--AS TO THE VULGATE, OR KING JAMES, OR LUTHER'S"

| Basil Manley |

Visit this developing site for more excellent material on...

http://www.tegart.com/brian/bible/kjvonly/index.html

TOP OF PAGE

written by Gary R. Hudson former co-editor of Baptist Biblical Heritage

now called THE PILGRIM Magazine

E-Mail: Pilgrimpub@aol.com (1st) E-Mail: Pilgrimp@swbell.net (2nd)

| Join our company: "The Lord gave the WORD: great was the COMPANY of those that PUBLISHED it." [Psalm 68:11] — Please, Copy this article, pass it on, and mail to others. Permission granted by Bob L. Ross — No Copyright |